click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121204
20121204
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
from the progressive policy institute. we have senator bob packwood from oregon, former chairman of the senate finance committee, part of the 1986 negotiations. and the other folks here have been part of the conversation. my only message to the new arrivals, please jump in whenever you see fit. we have an hour to an hour and a half. if you hear something you want to weigh in on, don't wait for me. we're talking now about the other very small issue in this issue and that is tax policy and how best to put the nation on a sustainable fiscal path. the question of revenue, how much, where to get it, the options on the table and would like your thoughts. as you heard from chairman bachus. they need ideas to bridge this gap because we appear to be at a stale mate. i turn it over to john to get your thoughts knowing he has to leave and the center for american progress has come out with some ideas and john maybe you would like to weigh in on some of those and your thoughts on this debate. >> peter, i think following up on this morning's session, clearly to have a balanced approach we need
policy institute. we have bob packwood from oregon, the former chairman of the senate finance committee. we hope to get your thoughts. the other folks here have been part of the conversation. my only message to the new arrivals, please jump in whenever you see fit. we have about an hour to an hour half.fa i would direct the conversation as best i can. we're talking now about the other very small issue in this debate, and that is tax policy and how best to put the nation on a sustainable fiscal path and incorporate changes in tax policy to get there. the question of revenue, how much, where to get it, the options on the table, and like all your thoughts, they need some ideas. both sides need this to bridge this gap because right now we appear to be a stalemate. i will turn it over to john podesta to get your thoughts. knowing that john has to live, and the center for american progress has come up with ideas, and, john, maybe you would like to weigh in on some of those, and your thoughts on this debate. >> peter, following up on this morning's session, in order that a balanced approach, w
that will be calculated, and quite frankly, in a more simplified form been standard tax law. host: professor bob kelly? guest: when i say chaos i am -- professor buckley? >> when i say chaos, i am referring to two things. the irs has done programming based on their being a patch enacted by the end of the year. most tax returns software has made the same calculated gamble. i agree that the government needs revenue. i do not think there is any question of that. if you just say that the amt is a good tax because it raises revenue, i do not argue on the notion that we need money, however is an extraordinarily arbitrary way of raising revenue. it raises revenue not from the super wealthy. the amt applies to few people making more than half of $1 million. it is counter-intuitive. if you are going to raise revenue, it should be as president obama has suggested, shared sacrifice, and that sacrifice has to come from people making more than half of $1 million. host: how do the very wealthy get out of paying the amt? guest: because of the rate structure. the rate between $200,000 and $500,000 are at least as hig
, so many who wanted to speak. but i want to say to you what i said bob wright of autism speech earlier today. i think you for caring about somebody other than your children and ourselves. because what you're doing here today is raising this issue so that other children, other than those that may be in your own family, maybe your friends, will benefit in the future. you're touching the future and you're making it possible for those who are going through the optimism -- the hottest inspector disorders to have a better future. so -- the autism spectrin disorders to have a better future. so i urge you to stay the course. one thing i have learned in 17 years is that, in order for these causes to move forward, you have to keep banging the drum. and you must bang it louder and louder in presenting your case so that, after it is all over, as my mother would say, motion, commotion, emotion and no results. i want you to be successful in what you're doing. life is short. so we must try to use our energy so that we can get the best possible results. i am so glad the chairman said what he said abou
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4